Categories: Delaware Court Opinions

MUMFORD AND MILLER CONCRETE v. STRUCTA-BOND, 827 A.2d 30 (Del. 2003)

MUMFORD AND MILLER CONCRETE, INC. and ST. PAUL COMPANIES f/k/a UNITED STATES FIDELITY AND GUARANTY COMPANY, Defendants Below, Appellants, v. STRUCTA-BOND, INC., Plaintiff Below, Appellee.

No. 578, 2002.Supreme Court of Delaware.Submitted: June 16, 2003.
Decided: July 2, 2003.

Court Below: Superior Court of the State of Delaware in and for New Castle County C. A. No. 98C-10-327

MUMFORD AND MILLER CONCRETE, INC. and ST. PAUL COMPANIES f/k/a UNITED STATES FIDELITY AND GUARANTY COMPANY, Defendants Below, Appellants, v. STRUCTA-BOND, INC., Plaintiff Below, Appellee. No. 578, 2002 Supreme Court of Delaware. Submitted: June 16, 2003 Decided: July 2, 2003

Before VEASEY, Chief Justice, BERGER and STEELE, Justices.

E. Norman Veasey, Chief Justice:

ORDER
This 2nd day of July 2003, the Court, having carefully considered the decision and judgment of the Superior Court dated September 17, 2002, together with the briefs of the parties, has determined that to the extent that (a) the issues raised on appeal are factual, the record evidence supports the factual findings; (b) the errors alleged on appeal are asserted to be an abuse of discretion, the record does not support those assertions; and (c) the issues raised on appeal are legal, they are controlled by settled Delaware law, which was properly applied.

NOW, THEREFORE, IT IS ORDERED that the judgment of the Superior Court is AFFIRMED on the basis of, and for the reasons set forth, in its decision dated September 17, 2002.

jdjungle